Mcgrady given maximum sentence of four-plus years in prison

Former Mother Lode Christian School coach Mona Mcgrady received the maximum sentence of four years and four months in state prison on Tuesday in Tuolumne County Superior Court after being convicted by a jury on three child sex crimes against a former student-athlete who was molested in the 1990s.

“It’s finished. It’s over. We did this as a community, not as a mob,” said the confidential victim in the case known as Jane Doe 1. “I hope that in the depths of her soul, someday she can come to terms with what she’s done. My family and my kids are stronger because of this.”

Mcgrady sat beside Clint Parish, her Sonora-based attorney, for the entire two-hour hearing with a blue surgical mask, a black-and-white striped Tuolumne County jail uniform, and her hands shackled in front of her.

The 62-year-old was found guilty by a jury on Sept. 17 of two counts of lewd or lascivious acts with a 15-year-old girl and one count of sexual penetration by a foreign object. She was found guilty of performing the lewd acts at her home and once in a school office during basketball season,

both when Jane Doe 1 was 15.

The sexual penetration act was at a hotel in Modesto while the victim was under the age of 18.

Mcgrady made no public comments to the court or to the public during the sentencing. Throughout her six-week trial when she was called as a defense witness and during a probation interview subsequent to her conviction, Mcgrady has denied any sexual relationship with Jane Doe 1 and another confidential victim, Jane Doe 2, who testified in the trial but whose allegations fell outside the statute of limitations.

The victims alleged ongoing sexual relationships with Mcgrady spanning years and overlapping with one another.

“The wreckage that Mrs. Mcgrady left in her wake as she moved on in her life kept her victims from living their lives,” said Tuolumne County Superior Court Judge Kevin Seibert. “The jury did not believe you. I do not believe you.”

Seibert implored McGrady to one day admit her crimes, apologize to the victims with remorse and seek their forgiveness.

“You can still give them the acknowledgement these crimes happened, that these terrible things happened,” Seibert said. “These things can go a long way to helping them heal and helping you heal.”

The hearing also included victim impact statements from Jane Doe 1, her husband, her 20-year-old son, her 17-year-old daughter and her father.

“Without the pain and suffering in my mom and I’s relationship, we could not be as close as we are today: best friends,” said Jane Doe 1’s daughter.

Most of the speakers asked Seibert to grant McGrady the maximum sentence in state prison. Some also expressed disbelief in the duration of her maximum sentence as not commensurate with the weight of her crimes.

“I believe only God can give what she deserves,” said Jane Doe 1’s father, who added he believed she should do life in prison. “It was her bravery that she stood and had to bring her horrible school years into other ears. I’m very proud of her for her strength.”

Jane Doe 1’s 20-year-old son referred to Mcgrady as a “pedophile” and a “predator.”

“She’s a threat to society and must stay away from children as long as possible,” he said.

Jane Doe 1 and her husband had their statements written and read by others aloud in court.

Jane Doe 1 said, “I’m done giving her any more of myself,” before handing her statement away and returning to her seat in tears.

Her statement was the longest at the hearing and covered her ongoing trauma, efforts at counseling and the ongoing detriments the sexual abuse had to her personal relationships.

“That was the strategic, calculated work of a psychopath,” the statement said.

Jane Doe 1 also wrote how she felt further victimized by the trial process and Mcgrady’s repeated denials of responsibility. Even before the trial occurred, Jane Doe 1 said she was “intimidated” by Mcgrady’s presence in her restaurant and Mcgrady’s deliberate distortions of photographs and other evidence in her defense testimony.

“The manipulation and jealousy she bred in us is still suffering to us all,” Jane Doe 1’s statement said. “I understand what she did was not love, but abuse.”

Her husband’s statement lamented the harm that the sexual abuse did to their marital intimacy and to the livelihoods of their four children.

“As a father, I grieve for them, for such senseless acts committed on my wife,” he said. “Mona Mcgrady may be out of prison by then, but we will be imprisoned for the rest of our lives.”

The statement from Jane Doe 1’s sister was read by Aleja Oliva, Jane Doe 1’s friend and a prosecution witness.

“Now my sister is free,” the statement said. “She is free from her torture and pain.”

Parish said he believed there was an “appealable issue” in the case, but he had not discussed with McGrady whether an appeal would be filed at this time.

“We’re disappointed the judge reached the sentence he did,” Parish said. “We are personally appreciative to the judge and his professionalism for thinking it through and the dedication to his ruling. That’s really what we expect from a judge of his caliber.”

Parish argued that McGrady shouldn’t receive prison time and that the probation report which recommended the maximum sentence was “biased.”

“The law is supposed to be about justice and not mob justice,” Parish said.

Tuolumne County Assistant District Attorney Eric Hovatter argued for the maximum sentence and accused Mcgrady of perjury.

“The defendant in this case was in a position of trust, a position of authority, and she used that position to conceal her conduct,” he said.

Hovatter said Mcgrady was “arrogant in the way she portrayed her information” so she could “beguile the jury” into an acquittal.

Seibert noted he read 42 letters on behalf of McGrady and roughly the same amount on behalf of the victim.

Though Seibert said supporters of both sides would find perspective in the writings, he noted the supporters of Mcgrady elevated her public good works and positive reputation while ignoring the accusations against her. He said he was reminded of trial testimony, when many professed to have the same opinion of Mcgrady while the abuse was occurring. He was also critical of staff at Mother Lode Christian School in Tuolumne of “being colorblind when staring at bright red warning flags” regarding Mcgrady’s inappropriate behavior with underage students.

Seibert granted the maximum sentence of three years on the first of the convicted charges, Count 8. He explained that California law dictated that the maximum sentence on subsequent charges be only one-third of the midterm sentence of two years, or eight months each.

Mcgrady will have to register as a sexual offender following her release from prison.

According to the probation department, she served 63 actual days in jail and earned 62 days in conduct credits for a total of 125 days time-served.

The hearing opened with Seibert denying motions from Parish that argued for the dismissal of count eight (the conviction of sex at Mona Mcgrady’s home when Jane Doe 1 was 15) for a lack of sufficient evidence and to have counts eight and 12 (the conviction for sex in the Mother Lode Christian School office during basketball season when Jane Doe 1 was 15) dismissed for being beyond the statute of limitations.

Seibert denied the statute of limitations argument and gave a lengthy rebuke to the District Attorney’s Office for what he said was an insufficient argument to protect the guilty verdicts.

“When the court received this brief, the court was not prepared for the reality that the people (prosecution) did essentially nothing,” Seibert said.

In Parish’s motion, he provided multiple passages from Jane Doe 1’s testimony that indicated the contradictions in her memory as to when the abuse occurred. He said because the abuse may have occurred after she was 15 years old, the court should dismiss the count or grant a new trial on it.

Seibert said he was “shocked” the prosecution did not provide passages from the transcript to bolster their argument and instead he had to seek them out to confirm Jane Doe 1 also alleged that the acts occurred when she was 15.

“To say the court is disappointed [in the prosecution] … extremely underestimates the court’s position,” he said.